Liber decretorum Dionysii

From Clavis Canonum


Title Liber decretalium Dionysii
Key DX
Alternative title Sammlung der Decretalen (Maassen)
Alternative title Dekretalensammlung des Dionysius (Wurm)
Alternative title The Decretal Collection (Firey)
Alternative title Collectio Decretorum (d'Avray)
Size Very small (less than 100 canons)
Terminus post quem 496
Terminus ante quem 523
Century saec. VI
Place of origin Rome
European region of origin Central Italy
General region of origin Southern Europe and Mediterranean
Main author User:Christof Rolker


Dionysius, after having translated conciliar canons, compiled a collection of decretals, using previous collections (not papal registers). Scholars agree that the resulting Liber decretalium was not completed before the second version of the conciliar collection (= Dionysiana II), but disagree whether the decretal collection was part and parcel of this second version or rather added later.

Importantly, Dionysius distinguished between different kinds of papal letters and selected only "legal" (as opposed to "dogmatic") letters, a distinction that had a profound impact on Western canon law (d'Avray).

The Liber decretalium began with a dedicatory letter to a certain priest Julian followed by a capitulatio in the form of a numbered list of all rubrics of the decretals (Wurm p. 62).

Contents

The Liber decretalium does not have an independent manuscript tradition; it has to be reconstructed from later collections. According to Wurm, Studien pp. 62-81, it originally contained 36 (sic) decretals plus one imperial rescript:

1. Siricius, JK 255 2. Innocent I, JK 311 3. Innocent I, JK 286 4. Innocent I, JK 293 5. Innocent I, JK 314 6. Innocent I, JK 315 7. Innocent I, JK 316 8. Innocent I, JK 304 9. Innocent I, JK 317 10. Innocent I, JK 313 11. Innocent I, JK 297 12. Innocent I, JK 302 13. Innocent I, JK 301 14. Innocent I, JK 309 15. Innocent I, JK 306 16. Innocent I, JK 308 17. Innocent I, JK 305 18. Innocent I, JK 310 19. Innocent I, JK 307 20. Innocent I, JK 318 21. Innocent I, JK 299 22. Innocent I, JK 303 23. Zosimus, JK 339. According to Wurm p. 70 Zosimus JK 345 (his no. "23a") was added after JK 339 in later versions. 24. Boniface, JK 353 25. Rescript by Emperor Honorius see Wurm p. 71 and Maassen p. 320 26. Boniface, JK 349 27. Boniface, JK 362 28. Celestine, JK 381, followed by a short florilegium (Wurm p. 72: no. 28a) 29. Celestine, JK 369 30. Celestine, JK 371 31. Leo I, JK 402 32. Leo I, JK 405 33. Leo I, JK 414 34. Leo I, JK 416 35. Leo I, JK 544 36. Leo I, JK 411 37. Leo I, JK 536

The following three item are additions not found in the "reine Dionysiana" according to Wurm p. 75-77:

37a. Leo I, JK 410 38. Gelasius I, JK 363 39. Anastasius, JK 744

The Collectio Dionysiana adaucta contains further additions from the letters of Leo I (Wurm pp. 77-78), namely JK 406, JK 412, JK 389, JK 399, JK 485, and JK 415.

The manuscripts

There are 2 manuscripts containing the Liber decretalium described in this Wiki. See Category:Manuscript of DX and the individual entries:

Scholars disagree about the number of extant manuscripts of the decretal collection, partly because they disagree about its relation to the collection of conciliar canons. In any case, there are different lists of manuscripts:

Editions and Literature

The editions of the Liber decretalium have been called "a bibliographical nightmare" (Brett, Theodore, p. 122 n. 5) for good reasons. According to Brett (pp. 138-140), the textual history can be described as follows: Justel's 1628 edition of the Dionysiana depended on his own copy (today Oxford, Bodleian Library, e Mus. 103) which has no decretals. In the second edition, however, "he printed the capitula of the decretals as far as Anastasius II from an unknown source" (p. 138); only in the 1661 edition, the text of the decretals was added. Turner and Kuttner suspected that the source for this addition was Colchaeus' 1525 edition or its 1609 reprint which in turn relies on three copies of the Dionysio-Hadriana; Brett, in contrast, followed Wurm Studien p. 51 n. 74 who suspected that the 1661 edition relied on a corrupt Hadriana manuscript. As Brett p. 139 concluded:

"It seems to follow that the edition of 1661 is based on the second Dionysiana proper for the councils, but on a poor manuscript of the Hadriana for the decretals. As the Ballerini noted long ago (PL 56, 199-200), and Wurm after them (Studien , pp. 70 (no.23a), 75 (no.37a) and 79), the 1661 edition therefore included in the decretal section which does belong to the early Dionysiana some letters which were added later, notably Zosimus c. 4 and Leo I c. 49, as well as the appendix from Hilary onwards. These additions accumulated slowly; the Hadriana marks a late stage in the process. The 1661 text is also full of readings proper only to the Hadriana. [...]"

Literature

  • David Heith-Stade, Dionysius Exiguus, doi:10.1017/9781108559133.015

Categories

  • key is DX
  • belongs to: Dionysiana group
  • from Rome
  • saec. VI
  • entries based on Migne